HPE deja vu
Just HPE? Surely this is back to mainframe days.
Hardware giant Dell and its software-slinging sibling VMware have unveiled a service that enables customers to deploy Dell-EMC-built IT infrastructure on-premises without having to buy it outright. The VMware Cloud on Dell EMC offers the entire software-defined data centre (SDDC) stack from VMware – including vSphere, vSAN and …
I'm entertained that the comment section on this site is largely taken over by we old timers who do realize this is just the same wheel turning around again.
What makes it funny is that a news site such as this requires new!, shiny! to have anything to talk about!
Whether it's agile or devops (lately), design patterns, language fad of the week, or whatever they went on about before - all of which also are just the same old wheel rotation - they need the "new" part of news, or there's not much to sell. So I cut them a bit of slack, while...still having a chuckle.
At least the hardware changes, though more slowly now...
Managers in any sufficiently large company have a need to seen implement changes, "Otherwise, what are they for?" is the feeling. It appears that these don't have to be positive changes and, of course, moving expense from one balance to another, hopefully, off their own.
Ah yes, I remember TimeNet and 110 / 300 baud modems. Long before most here were even a twinkle in their mom and pops eyes.
The reason you saw this was that computers were big, and expensive. Back in the 90's I was at a client's where they just retired some drum drives. (Yes, I am not kidding. The things were huge and had less storage than your phone has today.) But I digress. Many companies could not afford mainframes or even minis. So they leased time on machines because that was all that they could afford.
AWS got started because they needed more Horsepower during peak season and then they wanted to make use of that excess capacity.
I agree that the concept used by AWS isn't new, but its not retro.
But like the cost of computing dropping to the point where people can take their stuff in house... that too is also coming. Its still a few years out, but Google's new release of on Prem Cloud software offering may help.
Certainly sounds like using an on-site rented mainframe as it used to be done, complete with engineers on site or visiting, system support on call, etc.
If this catches on it may revive IBM's fortunes since this is how they used to operate. This assumes, of course, that they haven't yet fired all their old-timers - the ones who understand how that type of customer support should work.
Sorry, but yes. Private clouds do exist. Can't say where due to NDAs and other legal handcuffs.
The US Government could cut some of their expenditures in half if they did this rather than fight to go to the cloud like AWS.
But that will take some smart people while the only people going in to politics look to line their pockets and you have to wonder who's funding their campaigns.
So, now you have the system on your premises, but you still have to grant a third party access to the systems, what's the difference with the normal non-owned cloud? Nothing, just a hypocritical facade. If a company wants a private cloud to protect their data from industrial espionage surely this is not the solution.
It's a joke similar to the hypocritical solution usually applied to comply with GDPR whereby the data centre is located somewhere in Europe, but then the system administration is done via remote console from countries like India or the Philippines by workers whose pay is so low that they can be easily bribed.
Uh no, it makes perfect sense.
Look, MBAs and Cloud slingers tell you to do a TCO for 3years or less.
But when you do a TCO for 5 years... the results flip.
I'm actually sitting on a client site that has something like this in place. (I won't say the company or the vendor due to NDAs and such)
For them in some applications it makes sense.
The other thing to consider is bare metal w K8 and Docker. While this is still immature... its the future.
BTW think of it this way... you can choose to own a home, or rent. If you move around and don't have the capital to invest, renting makes sense. (Until it doesn't) If you have the capital and can afford the mortgage and are not planning to move around ... owning makes sense.
You just need to look at it from a different perspective.
His reply is spot on, it's just that you guys are talking past each other.
His comments really relate to buy versus rent. In this case, he appears to be going after any notion of renting since your solution is long term and, if you have the cash, owning is the better choice. Whether it's on premise or in the cloud is immaterial in this example.
This entire idea is just like the decision of choosing whether to buy a house or rent a house. If you are going on vacation then renting is the right choice. If you are picking where you're going to live for more than the next 3 years or so then owning is probably the best choice. If you're really just wanting to be a drifter then under the overpass is a choice too (not a good one but....).
What do you mean third party access?
It doesn't work that way.
They set up the hardware and its merely applying a license key change to turn a feature on. In this case adding access to hardware already sitting on prem.
You have the hardware already installed in your DC. You have a licensing key that limits the amount of hardware you have access to. Need more, call up and get a new key. Apply the key, now you have more VMs and Disk.
No, not OK.
You lost the part of the article where they say that the vendor will take charge for the system administration, therefore the customers will have to grant them access. As with the rules of the GDPR the problems is always the same, talking so much about the location of the machine and not talking about the remote access to the systems leads to a phony protection.
He added that customers want to take advantage of cloud as a model, not a place: “They don’t think about it, they just call an API and get what they need,” Colbert said. “Customers are not managing the underlying infrastructure anymore, that’s taken care of by the cloud provider.
It's the usual BS you read when they want to impose something to the customers. They start claiming that this is what the customers want. I remember when I began reading on a lot of articles that people don't want to type a PIN, then my bank told me they were sending me a contactless card. I replied "I don't want a contactless card, I want to type the PIN" the bank replied "you don't want to type a PIN, you're gonna have a contactless card". And now I have to keep a heavy anti-skim wallet.
It's a new take on share-cropping.
These companies rent you what you need to do business and in return they take a cut of the proceeds. It seems to me that this is pitched at the bean counters not the IT department. Savings now but a perpetual tithe on the business and who the hell has managed to make a phone-call to an API? That will, presumably,be left to the remnants of the IT department to take care of, if indeed, there is an IT department.
Why get a one-off payment when you can gouge the customer forever?
Competition will keep Dell EMC in check.
The reason this offer is viable is two-fold, changes in the US tax code make OPEX in some cases better than CAPEX, along with Wall Street looking dimly on “too much” debt on the books.
What also makes this work is Dell Financial Services, Dell T’s private bank...
Dell T is just being opportunistic. And with today’s business climate, who knows HPE, IBM, & NetApp may do the same. In which case, the customer wins.
>> Dell T is just being opportunistic. And with today’s business climate, who knows HPE, IBM, & NetApp may do the same. In which case, the customer wins.
ah - someone else who didn't read the article... you missed the bit where the guy from HPE said HPE *already* do this, and have been doing for years.
VMware is convinced that, much like millennials, modern businesses are not interested in actually owning any assets. At the same time, the company doesn’t believe all workloads will move to the cloud: some organizations will be grounded by data residency rules, some will prefer to maintain full control of their IT, and some will require their digital resources in immediate proximity.
Look, I'm not against people getting a good education or to stop learning.
But I have to seriously ask what are they teaching in school these days.
You buy hardware. Its a capital expense and you have to write it off over the anticipated lifetime of the machine. For durable goods its normally 7 years, but there's a 3 year accelerated depreciation schedule for things like hardware. So when you do a 3 year TCO, you're still writing off the machine. But in year 4, you don't have the cost of hardware.
Now tell me how long do these machines last? Much longer than 3 years.
If we look at AWS, they make a small profit on new hardware. But the rules of accounting... after 3 years, their profit margin jumps considerably. They can reduce the rates on older machines, but again, they are making huge margins because you're paying for their hardware expense that no longer exists.
For most enterprises, owning makes sense. Leasing data center locations is one thing, owning hardware is another. Going to a public cloud also makes some sense in certain situations, but for the most part. The costs don't pan out when you look at a longer ownership period. Do a 5yr TCO and you'll see.